|
This issue of Discussions presents four articles exploring the implications of the Arizona court ruling, as well as delving into the debate over the handling of metadata in court and corporate settings.
As the opening article from JURIST reports, the Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that the metadata attached to a public record is considered part of the public record and is therefore accessible by records request. This ruling opens access to technical information associated with electronic documents – such as when and how a particular document was created and edited, and who has access to it – which can greatly impact decisions made in court. With increased interest in opening federal and state government projects to public opinion and feedback, availability of public record metadata will play a significant role in informing public discussion. The second article summarizes a few examples of how the discovery of public record metadata has exposed lobbyists’ efforts to influence Congress. The third article illustrates the different viewpoints on the handling of metadata in discovery from state to state through a discussion surrounding two ethical opinions released by New Hampshire and Maine. Both states agree that lawyers sending electronic information have an obligation to avoid sending confidential information in metadata, but they diverge on how lawyers receiving this electronic information should handle confidential metadata. The final article steps out of the court room and into the office to point out the importance of metadata when faced with an employee defecting with confidential information to a competitor. Preserving the information contained in the metadata of your employee’s electronic data, such as creation and access dates, is crucial when searching for evidence of wrongdoing and safeguarding your case. 
Arizona Supreme Court rules electronic data is matter of public record
By Brian Jackson
The Arizona Supreme Court [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] Thursday that data embedded in electronic versions of public records is part of the public record, and thus accessible through a records request. The court ruled in favor of David Lake, a sergeant with the Phoenix police department, who had requested access to public records regarding his job performance. Read more of this article at http://cataphora.com/out.php?go=7orgy Lobbyists beware: judge rules metadata is public record
The Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that the metadata attached to public records is itself a public record. Given the frequency with which metadata outs lobbyists' and corporations' efforts to mask their own contributions to public debates, this is a good thing.
By Jon Stokes The Arizona state Supreme Court has ruled that the metadata attached to public records is itself public, and cannot be withheld in response to a public records request. Such a ruling on file metadata may not seem like a huge win for open government advocates, but it definitely is, given that metadata has unmasked more than one lobbyist's effort to influence Congress. More at http://cataphora.com/out.php?go=9g4ny New Hampshire and Vermont Wade into the Metadata Mix
By Mark Porada
New Hampshire and Vermont have issued recent ethics opinions addressing the ethical obligations of sending and receiving lawyers as they relate to metadata. Both jurisdictions (As has essentially every other state to consider the issue) concluded that sending lawyers have a reasonable duty to avoid inadvertently disclosing metadata. When it comes to receiving lawyers, however, the states diverged. The rest of this posting is at http://cataphora.com/out.php?go=wgm4z An Employee Leaves, Does Your Data Follow?
By Carl J. Rychcik
You are familiar with the scenario: one of your employees leaves to go work for a competitor, but before he goes, he copies confidential information for use at his new job. While the scenario may not have changed much, the means of obtaining the information has. Read more of this article at Law.com http://cataphora.com/out.php?go=gkils |
